Shapiro joins the claim against Trump’s administration to reduce billions of funding already granted

The Director of Management and Budget Russ Vaught appears during a hearing on the Senate of Internal Security and Government Affairs at Capitol Hill on January 15, 2025 in Washington (photo of Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

Five words.

This is the basis on which Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro and 20 democratic general prosecutors question extensive cuts in the field of federal subsidies and assistance in the up-to-date trial against Trump’s administration. . 80-page complaint The Massachusetts deposited in the American District Court on Tuesday is focused on how Trump’s administration interpreted the five-lone federal regulations to rationalize the “national inclination and combustion campaign”, suddenly completing billions in granting funding for state and local governments, research institutions, universities, universities and other.

Full, Principle 2020 Promoted by the American Management and Budget Office, they state that federal agencies may cut off the subsidy “in accordance with the terms of the Federal Award, including, in the scope authorized by law, if the prize no longer affects the program’s goals or priorities of the Agency.” OMB explained that federal agencies can only end subsidies if there is evidence that money does not achieve the intended goals or that there is a reason to “significant question” of enforceability of achieving the goal.

Today I sue Trump’s administration with 19 other states and Washington to stop them from arbitrary cancellation of financing due to Pennsylvania.

[image or embed]

– Governor Josh Shapiro (@governorate.pa.gov) June 24, 2025 at 4:05 pm

But the Trump administration in February 26 Executive ordinance He selectively chose five words from the regulation “There is no effect … agency priorities” – to justify sudden cuts of federal assistance.

“In the implementation of this directive, the accused agencies now say – for the first time – that the clause means something completely new: that the clause allows agencies to end the Grand Awards, when the agency simply changes his mind,” says the lawsuit.

From the initial order authorizing the government department to get involved in the subsidy of the Federal Agency, the same sentence contained subsequent orders, agency notes and explanations to reduce billions of dollars in order to lend a hand many recipients throughout the country.

“It’s no secret that this president has ended a lot to capture federal funds for the States, but it is less known how Trump’s administration tries to justify his unlawful action,” Neronha said in a statement. “Almost every lawsuit has filed this coalition of democratic prosecutors against administration, is associated with its unlawful and glaring attempts to work out Americans from basic programs and services they rely on. Most often it has the form of illegal federal financing cuts, which the administration tries to justify using the so -called” priorities of the agency “. Here, we ask the courts to stop the nonsense.

A complaint, which calls a dozen bosses of the Federal Agency as accused, offers a litany of examples of the consequences of sudden cuts to the already granted federal subsidies and lend a hand: loss of restoration of habitats in Maine, ending efforts to combat the crime of hatred in New Jersey, observing shelter for migrants in Ilinois federal centers and subtraction of research from just maintaining smoke in Rurine, Rural Mevada.

“Thanks to the stroke of the feather, federal agencies deprived of critical states of funds, which rely on combating crime using violence and public security protection, equipment of law enforcement agencies, educating students, protection of public health, protecting clean drinking water, conduct medical and scientific research, deal with a lack of food safety by students at school, provide access to non -compatible benefits for employees, They lost their jobs and much more, “.

The Rhode Island Cutting influenced a pair of research subsidies of the University of Rhode Island financed by the Department of Defense and the National Foundation, as well as the modernization of the State Unemployment Insurance System through the US Department of Labor.

Even federal assistance still flowing remains threatened, threatening safety and support for people who qualify for food assistance programs and people living in flood zones, farmers, minority students, scientists and others, according to the states of the lawsuit.

Arguing that federal administration activities violate Act on administrative orders, AGS asked the federal judge to explain that federal provisions do not grant the “unrestricted power” agencies to resolve the funding already granted. Or, as an alternative, they asked the judge to throw away the interpretation by the Trump administration of the clause in question. The application, if it is granted, would apply to all existing and future federal subsidies.

Natalie Baldassarre, a spokeswoman for the US Department of Justice, who represents federal agencies, refused to comment on the lawsuit of WE -Mail on Tuesday.

In addition to Neronha, other AG, which lodged a complaint, they represent Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Vermont, Wisconsin and District Columbia. Pennsylvania governor Josh Shapiro also represents his state in this matter.